ghost-angel

Re: What do you know? Like I've been saying all along. You know something is happening. You may not know what. Can't make it any clearer than that. You know something is happening. End of story. Stuff is happening to me. There - done. What... up to GM to describe. But he has to describe it.

Re: What do you know? Funny stuff happened - stuff to their brain, stuff to their injuries. People who have never been burned tend to learn what "burning" is pretty quickly. So saying they've never encountered it isn't the best argument, just because you've never encountered something doesn't mean you can't perceive and deduce its effects on you.

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far I've seen police training videos where guys take a taser, get up and walk away. And I've seen police training videos where guys pee their pants and are reduced to tears for several minutes. you will never ever ever never model a tazer correctly in a game system to cover all the really weird reactions people have to being kicked with a couple thousand volts of electricity. It has as much to do with the target as it does the tazer's effect.

Re: What do you know? Correction - you have no frame of reference. In a game-world where such powers exist, people may very well have a frame of reference to understand when someone it altering their mind, or minds eye.

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far I like the decoupled CVs/Figureds. I think it makes much more sense. Just sayin'.

Re: What do you know? You could easily rule that both Powers have the exact same SFX regarding the Visibility Rules - therefore an outside observer would likely not Perceive a difference. the Target on the other hand, is aware of the Effects being done to them - as another example if you have a Flash with a linked Attack, both are a 'searing light' effect, just because the primary ability blinds them doesn't mean they don't know they were also damaged. Now, they likely have no idea What the Transform is doing, just that it is doing something. The rest really is best left in the GMs hands regarding Dramatic Sense.

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far Let's see... They could have High DEX + Physical Limitation The could have High DEX, High DCV, Low OCV The could have HIGH DEX, Low DCV, Low OCV The could have Low DEX, Skill Levels in specific areas The could have Low Dex, Lightning Reflexes and Skill Levels. They could have High Dex, High OCV, High DCV and their opponent just had way the heck more Skill Levels in Basketball They could all be real people and thus difficult to model in an abstract system on a piece of paper.

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

Re: Musings on Random Musings I got my wife a platinum band with a diamond, it was about 3/4 of a months salary or something. Looks nice. She likes diamonds, but not huge ones, and the place I went doesn't push more carats. In fact the saleslady spent way more time trying to get one with 'just the right flaw' to catch light in the ring I got than she ever did worrying about size or price.

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far RE: the whole non-lethal weapon is not a weapon - BS. RE: Tazers, I model them as Entangles.

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far Easier is a matter of perspective. I wish everyone would stop trying to tell everyone else what "makes sense" and what "is easier" and what "models reality." This is a game. It is suppose to provide options to model whatever the heck you want to model. The more options the more you can model to your own personal taste.

Re: Partial Growth Heck - even if it does (no one recognizes Superman)...

Re: What do you know? They know the effects of the Transform are hitting them. You would need some kind of IPE for them to not realize you've made a change. Generally, depending on my sense of drama at the exact moment, they may not know What Change was made without some form of deep Telepathy to check their internal wiring so to speak. Or they may some idea, but not the specifics.

Re: Partial Growth changing appearance in this case is merely a Special Effect of turning on ones Powers (activating the artifact). Two examples: He-Man, goes through his transformation sequence, changes appearances, *poof* Captain Marvel - says Shazam and transforms from Billy Batson to CM. Neither of them purchase an ability to change, they just do.

Re: Starting Point Totals

Re: Partial Growth I would go with either a Shapechange:Touch Group or as the Special Effects of whatever you see growing that extra foot in height provides. What do you envision going from 5' to 6' doing?

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far Yes yes.. I'm talking beyond mere Presence. I'm talking about Interaction Skill modifiers as well.

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far I'm just speculating, mind. could be providing bonuses to certain situations. I could imagine you could take a Frightening Countenance 'Striking Appearance' to add Bonuses to situations where Fear, Intimidation and Terror come into play.

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far I would imagine Striking Appearance might be similar to Reputation - some are good and some are bad. . . Perhaps it's now the opposite of the Distinctive Feature Complication. I'd like to see the text and Mechanics on this one.

Re: Starting Point Totals Nope it doesn't. Neither table lists Hard Limits on anything.

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far Occasionally, you get caught out of combat. Halving your DCV. Base DCV at that. You can't add CSLs to it. Also, now you can purchase DCV as "Small and hard to hit" without worrying about in/out of combat or 'fudging' it. It's rare, but it's been a voiced concern for a while. Also, they go away completely when Stunned. Not Halved. That, by itself, is a big deal to some.

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far I believe he was referring to the idea that CSLs aren't "true CVs" as they a not Persistent.

Re: Starting Point Totals Actually, Table 2 says they are "typical" and not a hard limit in any way. It even suggests that some of the characteristics will exceed the suggested range from table 2.

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far hummm... New Oxford American: /Charm/ the power or quality of giving delight or arousing admiration (Thesaurus, Oxford) - noun 1 people were captivated by her charm attractiveness, beauty, glamour, loveliness; appeal, allure, desirability, seductiveness, magnetism, charisma. 2 these traditions retain a lot of charm appeal, drawing power, attraction, allure, fascination. 3 magical charms spell, incantation, conjuration, magic formula, magic word, mojo, hex. 4 a lucky charm talisman, fetish, amulet, mascot, totem, juju. verb 1 he charmed them with his singing delight, please, win (over), attract, captivate, allure, lure, dazzle, fascinate, enchant, enthrall, enrapture, seduce, spellbind. 2 he charmed his mother into agreeing coax, cajole, wheedle; informal sweet-talk, soft-soap; archaic blandish. /Seduce/ attract (someone) to a belief or into a course of action that is inadvisable or foolhardy. (Thesaurus, Oxford) - verb 1 he took her to his hotel room and tried to seduce her persuade to have sex; euphemistic have one's way with, take advantage of; (dated debauch.) 2 she was seduced by the smell of coffee attract, allure, lure, tempt, entice, beguile, inveigle, maneuver. .... Charm definitely carries sexual connotations with it, so those aren't removed. Seduce has non-sexual connotations, but doesn't seem to be nearly as broad as Charm. Either way. I can't possibly fathom why it'd be a big deal to change the name from one to the other. They have overlapping aspects. I can't even fathom why it'd be a minor deal.

Re: What Have You Watched Recently? Sukiyaki Western Django pure awesome. Cross between fun, violent, classic spaghetti western, and odd Japanese history. And the only Django "sequel" to take a stab at the origin of Django, that I'm aware of. (Hey, there are like 50 sequels to Django, I haven't seen 'em all.)